No appeal for Springs ‘house of horrors’ dad

The children’s plight came to light after the oldest son sought help from neighbours following a particularly brutal beating.

Tuesday, 22 January 2019, 08:33

The Springs father who tortured his five children for over a decade in their “house of horrors” has lost his bid to appeal against an effective sentence of 35 years in prison.

NATIONAL NEWS - The Springs father who tortured his five children for over a decade in their “house of horrors” has lost his bid to appeal against an effective sentence of 35 years in prison.

In October last year, Judge Eben Jordaan sentenced the father, 40, to 67 years’ imprisonment for raping his daughter (then 16), attempting to murder his son, 11, abusing and neglecting his children, trying to defeat the ends of justice, interfering with police duties as well as dealing in and being in possession of drugs.

He ordered that a psychological report, which described the father as a psychopath and sadist with low prospects of rehabilitation and a high risk for violent behaviour, must be taken into account when he was considered for parole.

The children’s mother, 40, who the judge described as a battered woman, was given a five-year suspended jail term for neglecting her children, defeating and obstructing justice and drug possession on condition she received psychological treatment.

The father, who claimed to have “found the Lord” in prison, told reporters after he was sentenced he would appeal because he “did none of those things” and wanted to see his children again because “they were his whole life”.

Dismissing the father’s application for leave to appeal against his sentence, Jordaan emphasised the cruel nature of the abuse and said, in his view, no court would come to a different conclusion.

The children’s plight came to light after the oldest son sought help from neighbours following a particularly brutal beating. He said in a statement he hated his father and wanted him to die in prison and go to hell.

His older sister said she had forgiven her father and hoped to make a better life for herself, but that she never wanted to see her parents again.

The father maintained the court had given little weight to his personal circumstances, while overemphasising the facts of the case.

He believed they should have taken into account his low intellectual functioning, his clean criminal record and that he was exposed to violence as a child.